Ishq Garaari torrent reviews

Ethan S (ca) wrote: A step down in every way. The first rule of a sequel is to up the ante and raise the stakes. By repeating the same story as the original, all the surprises (which made the first one so special) are gone. Notably, the acting has gone down significantly. No one in this film can carry their part, and Annie's ho hum return is an agonizing disappointment. After putting up such a fight in the first one, her character arc closes with a whimper. This isn't just a bad movie, it is a bad sequel. Oh, and the twist at the end works about as well as a half baked chicken. There are only two suspects, so you just sit waiting to hear which one is the killer. Boring stuff.

Greg W (fr) wrote: just ok look at '60's london

Paul H (it) wrote: I'm surprised I even gave this movie a 1 star, if you want a word to describe what I think... 'Bad' is the nice word for it... It's like a bad remake of the Blair witch project, only at least the Blair witch project had a premise that drew in the viewers. This film is just utterly ridiculous and unfortunately doesn't warrant a second viewing.. The beginning is slow, you don't know what's going on and as the movie progresses it gets steadily worse, I've had more thrills watching a B movie than this... Don't bother!

specter s (mx) wrote: Madison County starts off with a group of college students on a missionto discover the truth behind a tell-all book which outlines a string ofmurders that happened in the remote town. Sounds promising right?Wrong. Unfortunately the dialog is so bad it is painful to watchbecause you feel bad for the actors. The camera work is shaky (and notin a good horror movie way), but just looks cheap. The director triesto develop the characters, but the dialog is just so bad you can'tdevelop any connection to the characters and in turn the first half ofthe movies drones on without any reward.Maybe the only redeeming quality is that it isn't too long, so youwon't feel like you wasted too much of your life.

Deb S (de) wrote: This is a satirical film about our failing education system but it's not as funny or enjoyable as I thought it would be. Cute little kid actors but I was expecting more from Jason Briggs and Eva Longoria. I would give this one a miss.

Tobias B (kr) wrote: A mix of movie plots seen before that never takes off. Fares and Skarsgaard is ok though. A weak 2 star rating.

Walfy W (ag) wrote: Quite an emotion-filled movie. I would say this is the best of the ten or so Van Damme movies I have watched. I highly recommend it.

Blake P (ca) wrote: "Changing Lanes" isn't interested in a bare bones approach to the revenge movie: it has more complicated things in mind, being a game of cat-and-mouse less concerned with making right and more about tap dancing on the fragile floor of what we'd call the ethical dilemma. In it, two men, played by Ben Affleck and Samuel L. Jackson, are buried in a circle of oneupmanship, reminiscent of the diabolical games characterized in 1972's "Sleuth." Their disdain for one another is a factor of a chance encounter. Both are driving to critical moments in their personal and professional lives, Doyle Gipson (Jackson) to a court-appointed custody hearing, Gavin Banek (Affleck), a stellar young lawyer, to a court case that could make or break the reputation of his firm. It's Friday and traffic is bad, and Banek, being too caught up in preparation, bumps Gipson's car and causes him to crash, flattening his tire in the process. Mannered exchanges are traded, but nerves are stomped on when Banek absentmindedly writes Gipson a blank check, despite objections from the latter that he needs immediate help, not passing aid. But Banek runs off, his farewell a cringeworthy rendition of the classic "better luck next time" line. In return, Gipson is twenty minutes late to his meeting, giving the jury incentive to grant his wife (Kim Staunton) sole custody), with Banek's case stilted by the fact that he accidentally left an important file with Gipson in their scuffle. So when they bump into each other once again later in the day, something in Gipson, a recovering alcoholic, snaps. Knowing of the importance the file has on Banek's career, he uses it to taunt his opponent; but being high and mighty, Banek does everything he can to force the man into returning the document, going so far as to cause him faux bankruptcy that inhibits an impending loan. The stakes get higher and the spectacle of revenge grows increasingly ravenous. But there comes a point by which the men are handed a metaphorical mirror and are forced to see themselves from a perspective that goes far beyond self-interest. "Changing Lanes" never stops being arresting because we are never provided with easy answers; choosing sides, trading sympathies, is not an uncluttered option. Banek and Gipson are not uncomplicated figures of heroism nor villainy. Both slither around on a day to day basis telling themselves that they're acting selflessly, but self-interest is what waits on the other side. Penchant anger is always resting somewhere deep within their beings, waiting to be unleashed; what they don't have in common class-wise is made up for in the way they can hardly control themselves when something doesn't go the way they'd like. So maybe it's no coincidence that they find themselves parties to a car wreck - maybe these two were always meant to push each others buttons, to cause the other to look deep within themselves and discover why life has always been a balancing act. The pairing of Jackson and Affleck, though initially ponderous, works its way into being successfully (and authentically) maleficent, Jackson being the middle-aged screw-up who has never gotten his life together, Affleck the young upstart who seemingly has it all, despite only being in his 20s. Under different circumstances, these men might have gotten along, or, better yet, never crossed paths. But their accidental meeting seems to be one of fate in "Changing Lanes," and we're kept glued to the screen, never quite sure of where their paths of vengeance will take them. Jackson and Affleck give terrific performances, portraying their characters' neuroses with an effective mix of fury and vulnerability. And so nothing in "Changing Lanes" is simple, and that's what I like best about it. There are no right answers, no right characters, no right roads to travel down - it's a battle of reputations and needs with much moral ambiguity to further its richness.

Rebecca H (us) wrote: Laurence (Joseph Fiennes - who can't act) narrates the story, but if you can ignore that, and do try, we start with Daniel (Tom Hollander) (pretty much my perfect man - rich, cute, insecure yet outwardly confident, considerate, romantic, a catch with the ladies and yet a gentleman). He meets Martha (Monica Potter - yawn) at an airport and falls in love, so he contrives to get them to sit next to each other on the plane. Unfortunately, Martha isn't interested in him, which, considering Daniel is the first character we get to know and he's brilliant, makes Martha instantly dull. She is completely dull anyway, in that yawn way that British romcoms feel the need - neurotic Englishman must fall for bland American woman. When they reach England, she (separately) meets his best friends Frank (Rufus Sewell) (a whining bum) and Laurence (boring and wooden with no personality), who also fall for her. Both Frank and Laurence are a bit psychotic with some very worrying body language. It really comes across as if Laurence is on pills to control his psychopathic nature, whereas Frank is off the pills and there were side effects. The plot is obvious immediately and it is insulting that it is played as a twist. It is also stupid - the film only works if Martha likes all three men, but she hates two of them, so what's the point to it all? Martha meets a man, likes him, runs away with him. DULL. And of course the moral is dump your lifelong friends for a woman you just met. The only fun you could have with this film is to imagine how you would re-cut it as a horror film. Seriously - if Laurence isn't a murderous stalker, I'm a mongoose.

Michael T (kr) wrote: A brilliant film... Solondz, has an acute ability to present real human beings on the screen, show their awful qualities, make us dislike them intensely, and then show us why they behave like they do, with the result that we feel that they are just like us after all...

Alex K (gb) wrote: This Movie Turned 25 Years Old In 2009.

Trent R (de) wrote: Fantastic cast, but other than a couple of decent set pieces and Forster's mighty man-mane, there is not much to this Godfather never-was.

Daren P (au) wrote: Despite the presence of Brendan Fraser, this film is cute, clever, innocent, and thoroughly enjoyable. Great cast and hip script make for a fun film.

Dan K (fr) wrote: The Nancy Sinatra theme song is probably second only to Goldfinger's opening theme. Solid entry to the Bond collection.